Gilligan wrote:It says Pete can border Mary. I didn't have a path connecting them, but I could still fortify there. Then I checked the XML, and it says you can attack Pete to Mary. They clearly do not border.

Game Number: 351049I have Mary and Pete.Rynn has Lola. Sean21us has Tim.Last Stand has ABC.Sean21us has Jane.

So how could I have fortified there if Pete is surrounded by opponents?

Gilligan wrote:It says Pete can border Mary. I didn't have a path connecting them, but I could still fortify there. Then I checked the XML, and it says you can attack Pete to Mary. They clearly do not border.

Game Number: 351049I have Mary and Pete.Rynn has Lola. Sean21us has Tim.Last Stand has ABC.Sean21us has Jane.

So how could I have fortified there if Pete is surrounded by opponents?

Gilligan wrote:It says Pete can border Mary. I didn't have a path connecting them, but I could still fortify there. Then I checked the XML, and it says you can attack Pete to Mary. They clearly do not border.

Game Number: 351049I have Mary and Pete.Rynn has Lola. Sean21us has Tim.Last Stand has ABC.Sean21us has Jane.

So how could I have fortified there if Pete is surrounded by opponents?

Jafnhár wrote:Is not "Fundamentalist" supposed to be "Fundamentalism"? Fundamentalist is one that holds that philosophy, but fundamentalism is the philosophy as a whole.

You almost have a point there.
Fundamentalism is not a philosophy but more of an attitude adopted in conjunction to any held conviction.

Though one must keep in mind that there are many kinds of fundamentalism.
The type I am referring to is definatly one that is held, in this case, by a group.
Thus fundamentalist.
The context of the map's theme further rarefies the possible holders of any philosophy (attitude) to the point that anyone with a slightly decent insight into the political atmosphere of the USA will know what is implied.

Gilligan wrote:It says Pete can border Mary. I didn't have a path connecting them, but I could still fortify there. Then I checked the XML, and it says you can attack Pete to Mary. They clearly do not border.

Game Number: 351049I have Mary and Pete.Rynn has Lola. Sean21us has Tim.Last Stand has ABC.Sean21us has Jane.

So how could I have fortified there if Pete is surrounded by opponents?

Thanks everyone for the support and encouragement in developing this map!

If you've got an uploaded map and xml you can run it through the border checker thingy...

C.

Hmm.. tried that but I couldn't get it to work.Is there a kind soul here that can check the code for me?

You should be able to do it from the http://www.conquerclub.com/maps/U_S__Senate.xml (or whatever) file - obviously you will have to assume you know you've got the one that is wrong... the rest you can use... It's a cool utility... can be useful for checking maps to see where borders are!!!

C.

EDIT : Ran it through the checker and apart from Pete and Mary all looks good...

It only checks big maps though so if you've got your co-ords wrong in small it might not work!!

Jafnhár wrote:Is not "Fundamentalist" supposed to be "Fundamentalism"? Fundamentalist is one that holds that philosophy, but fundamentalism is the philosophy as a whole.

You almost have a point there. Fundamentalism is not a philosophy but more of an attitude adopted in conjunction to any held conviction.

Though one must keep in mind that there are many kinds of fundamentalism.The type I am referring to is definatly one that is held, in this case, by a group.Thus fundamentalist.The context of the map's theme further rarefies the possible holders of any philosophy (attitude) to the point that anyone with a slightly decent insight into the political atmosphere of the USA will know what is implied.

I'm afraid we have a misunderstanding.

Fundamentalist is one who reduces religion to strict interpretation of core or original texts (along with other definitions, but still talking about a person).

Fundamentalism is reducing religion to strict interpretation of core or original texts (along with other definitions, but still talking about an attitude, not a person).

Now, it looks like there's some guy that holds fundamentalism opinions on this territory. Talking about a person instead of it as an attitude doesn't narrow the term, there are just as many definitions for it in a dictionary, but the difference between them is as stated above.

Gilligan wrote:It says Pete can border Mary. I didn't have a path connecting them, but I could still fortify there. Then I checked the XML, and it says you can attack Pete to Mary. They clearly do not border.

Game Number: 351049I have Mary and Pete.Rynn has Lola. Sean21us has Tim.Last Stand has ABC.Sean21us has Jane.

So how could I have fortified there if Pete is surrounded by opponents?

Jafnhár wrote:Is not "Fundamentalist" supposed to be "Fundamentalism"? Fundamentalist is one that holds that philosophy, but fundamentalism is the philosophy as a whole.

You almost have a point there. Fundamentalism is not a philosophy but more of an attitude adopted in conjunction to any held conviction.

Though one must keep in mind that there are many kinds of fundamentalism.The type I am referring to is definatly one that is held, in this case, by a group.Thus fundamentalist.The context of the map's theme further rarefies the possible holders of any philosophy (attitude) to the point that anyone with a slightly decent insight into the political atmosphere of the USA will know what is implied.

I'm afraid we have a misunderstanding.

Fundamentalist is one who reduces religion to strict interpretation of core or original texts (along with other definitions, but still talking about a person).

Fundamentalism is reducing religion to strict interpretation of core or original texts (along with other definitions, but still talking about an attitude, not a person).

Now, it looks like there's some guy that holds fundamentalism opinions on this territory. Talking about a person instead of it as an attitude doesn't narrow the term, there are just as many definitions for it in a dictionary, but the difference between them is as stated above.

Jafnhár wrote:Is not "Fundamentalist" supposed to be "Fundamentalism"? Fundamentalist is one that holds that philosophy, but fundamentalism is the philosophy as a whole.

You almost have a point there. Fundamentalism is not a philosophy but more of an attitude adopted in conjunction to any held conviction.

Though one must keep in mind that there are many kinds of fundamentalism.The type I am referring to is definatly one that is held, in this case, by a group.Thus fundamentalist.The context of the map's theme further rarefies the possible holders of any philosophy (attitude) to the point that anyone with a slightly decent insight into the political atmosphere of the USA will know what is implied.

I'm afraid we have a misunderstanding.

Fundamentalist is one who reduces religion to strict interpretation of core or original texts (along with other definitions, but still talking about a person).

Fundamentalism is reducing religion to strict interpretation of core or original texts (along with other definitions, but still talking about an attitude, not a person).

Now, it looks like there's some guy that holds fundamentalism opinions on this territory. Talking about a person instead of it as an attitude doesn't narrow the term, there are just as many definitions for it in a dictionary, but the difference between them is as stated above.

Still hasn't been answered ...

Come on guys this is the foundry. Its a forum for map making. Take this debate to the social lounge or flame wars.

qwert wrote:Can i ask you something?What is porpose for you to open these Political topic in ConquerClub? Why you mix politic with Risk? Why you not open topic like HOT AND SEXY,or something like that.

Jafnhár wrote:Is not "Fundamentalist" supposed to be "Fundamentalism"? Fundamentalist is one that holds that philosophy, but fundamentalism is the philosophy as a whole.

You almost have a point there. Fundamentalism is not a philosophy but more of an attitude adopted in conjunction to any held conviction.

Though one must keep in mind that there are many kinds of fundamentalism.The type I am referring to is definatly one that is held, in this case, by a group.Thus fundamentalist.The context of the map's theme further rarefies the possible holders of any philosophy (attitude) to the point that anyone with a slightly decent insight into the political atmosphere of the USA will know what is implied.

I'm afraid we have a misunderstanding.

Fundamentalist is one who reduces religion to strict interpretation of core or original texts (along with other definitions, but still talking about a person).

Fundamentalism is reducing religion to strict interpretation of core or original texts (along with other definitions, but still talking about an attitude, not a person).

Now, it looks like there's some guy that holds fundamentalism opinions on this territory. Talking about a person instead of it as an attitude doesn't narrow the term, there are just as many definitions for it in a dictionary, but the difference between them is as stated above.

Still hasn't been answered ...

Come on guys this is the foundry. Its a forum for map making. Take this debate to the social lounge or flame wars.

This is a barely a debate, he has only answered once and it does directly affect the map.

Look, I am doing you a favour by pointing out your mistakes in your map. I have done everything I can to point it out, but if you disagree, there is nothing more that I can do. I can't say that I care.

And saying that this is the wrong forum to discuss it because it affects scemantics (whatever that means) is like saying that this forum is wrong to discuss colours in maps, because they affect arts.